Banned books: An unfair trick to get kids to read Awful Lit.

I was forced to read Of Mice and Men in High School(it was that or The Great Gatsby and I reeeallly hate Fitzgerald). I live in Oklahoma so teachers tend to either want to ban everything or make us read all the banned books. Polarization is fun. Anyways, all I got from this book is that I could not take any of Steinbeck's longer works. That was possibly the most depressing thing I ever read for a school project. I think that the lesson I took from it was that just because something is banned or challenged doesn't mean it's going to be a fun and interesting read full of sex, drugs, and profanity.

Never read it, but I have read the great gatsby at uni and really enjoyed dissecting it as an illustration of the illusion of the American dream (my lecturer was obsessed with it being a fallacy.)

Generally, if something is frequently banned, I do read it. I take the ALA's top 100 challenged list as a "recommended reading list" most of the time, though that's mostly because I'm a librarian and because I have a son in public school and I like to know what the book is really like when it's being challenged. We're in Texas, which is frankly a hotbed of challenges and bannings, so I try to keep on top of things. But yes, just because it has naughty bits in it, doesn't mean it's good.

I, personally, love Steinbeck, and "Of Mice and Men" is one of my favorite books. My mother hates his work, though, she doesn't care for despressing books. I also liked Gatsby; loved the layering and peculiarities in it. As to banned books, I also use the 100 most challenged list as a suggested reading list for my kids. You'd be amazed what books are challenged and why!

I despise Of Mice and Men. The only Steinbeck book I like is Travels with Charley.

Teachers are overly fond of Steinbeck, aren't they? I've been forced to read The Pearl, The Red Pony, Of Mice and Men, and The Grapes of Wrath. Of all of these, I only liked the last one, though I couldn't tell you why.

I really disliked The Pearl and Of Mice and Men, and I've always thought it was a shame that schools like to use these books -- probably just because they're short -- to introduce Steinbeck. Later, on my own (but still in high school) I read and really liked Cannery Row, The Grapes of Wrath and (particularly) East of Eden.

I love Fitzgerald (every word he ever wrote).

Of Mice and Men is one of my least favorite books I have ever read, but East of Eden and Grapes of Wrath are in my top 5, and The Moon is Down is up there as well. Schools should use The Moon is Down instead of Of Mice and Men - short, engaging, and a history lesson all in one!

By fair means or foul, getting a teen to read a book can only be a 'good thing'. I would say that, 'cos I are a English teacher, innit. ;)

I always wonder why getting kids to read is considered a good thing if what they read makes them dislike reading even more. I love to read in spite of the stuff that I was forced to read in school not because of it.

I think I liked everything I read in high school, so long as I read it before my teachers ruined it by incorrectly analyzing it.

But as a recentish graduate of high school, everyone who came into school and loved reading continued to regardless, and those who hated it didn't change, regardless. I couldn't tell you why, but those who didn't read usually bought the SparkNotes. Those who did read always finished the books, even if they hated them.

I always wonder if so many people complain about having to read Stienbeck (or Fitzgerald, or Hemingway...) why do we even keep the guy around? Must be awful books, no wonder the book store shelves are always full of 'em, no one ever buys them (except evil English teachers)...

Hmm I don't know, I went on to do an English Lit BA despite Shakespeare and was still forced then at 19 to do a compulsory module on him. For me, I would rather have looked at Marlowe, Johnson or any of the other fantastic dramatists of that period. I eventually did my dissertation on gothic literature and I think that says a lot about my desire to subvert the literature 'canon.' That said, I guess teachers have to start somewhere, and you can't say you hate a writer if you've never heard of him or her!

I have been tricked into reading banned books, sometimes it worked well, other times I've been duped.

Lady Chatterley's Lover was a major disappointment. I have to read it again, just to see it was that bad the first time. And I read The Importance of Being Ernest and I loved it!

The Dragon Can't Dance was causing a major controversy because it was on the Sixth Form reading list. So I read it before school started and completely missed the one cuss word inside that was the cause of all the problems. That book I liked though.

Most of Judy Blumes' books for young adults were banned in US schools at one time, but she had me hooked since primary school so I loved everything she wrote.

I did love Judy Blume. Yay for preteeny angst. I also really like Oscar Wilde plays, although the rest of his work I can take or leave. I haven't read Lady Chatterley's Lover, but after seeing The Chatterley Affair I might try it. I'm going in with the expectation of disliking it, so if i do like it then it will be a pleasant surprise.

i watched a show that mentioned Farenheit 451 so i read it. it was good tho. i guess ill have to check out some more banned books so i can decided if banned books are better.

Steinbeck wrote some great literature but he also disseminated some grossly poor works of literature too in my opinion.

The Pearl seemed to be Steinbeck's desire to let the Hispanic community know that he knew something about their culture. Other than that, it was a total waste of time and effort in my opinion.

As to The Moon Is Down, it was simply a piece of propaganda literature. In it, Steinbeck effectively fleshes out the Germans and gives them a human face. A realistic picture of soldiers in a situation that they quietly wished they were not involved in.

On the other hand, the protagonists that Steinbeck writes about are so over the top that one wonders if Mayor Orden might have given an exercise on how to walk on water to his antagonists. They were just unrealistic in Steinbecks' portrayal of their "heroism".
Early on in this book, it was clear that Steinbeck didnot have a clue how people react to an overpowering invasion force in a war situation. He obviously had not even met anyone who had experienced such horror. He was basically winging it.

My only interest in this work is the fact that the Viking Press trade printing of the stage play version of this book initially published by The Dramatists Play Service is the rarest trade printing issued to the general retail trade.
A total of 250 copies were supplied to the Viking Press by The Dramatists Play Service and Viking rebound them in hardcover blue linen cloth bound copies and sold them to the trade at $1.75 a copy.

Steinbeck's other work that still mystifies me to this day is The Short Reign of Pippin IV. I am assuming this was supposed to be lighthearted and funny when in fact it was a lesson in literature that instantly brings on a severe case of boredom.

I collect Steinbeck and to this day have not finished reading Pippin IV. It's a terrible work of literature. In this instance, I have never figured out his motivation for writing this piece of wasted material nor have I been motivated to find out.

I think these authors stay on school reading lists because most of them did write significant books (although there is obviously disagreement over specific authors). Most kids, even smart ones, are not that likely to read more challenging literature on their own initiative, and even if they are likely to do so, they might not know about various authors absent English classes. No matter what is on the list, some people won't like some of the books.

I particularly hated Don Quixote, but I'm also kind of glad I had to read it for a class. If it hadn't been mandatory, I wouldn't have read it at all (or at least not much of it), and it is an important cultural reference. I also think it's important to be able to articulate why a reader doesn't like particular books, so having a few stinkers enables development of that skill.

I think I need to give The Grapes of Wrath another try. I suffered through it as summer reading going into my freshman year of high school (11 years ago) and think I must have really missed something.

I did enjoy Of Mice and Men, though.

And The Great Gatsby is one of my top 10. Love it!

I find it ironic to think that a book about book banning (Fahrenheit 451) has itself been banned.

I read it a couple of years ago, and though I did not read it with school kids in mind, I cannot think exactly why it would be banned. Was there the odd cuss word that I missed? Or was it his rebellion against authority?

No one's read depressing until they've read Andersonville.

20> I think there might be a cuss word in there once or twice. It's been a while since I read it. (um.. 5 years ago? Frosh year of college.)

The other really ironic book to be banned/censored is 1984. Yeah. IIRC, Orwell got really pissed when he heard someone had edited it to change certain bits to be less offensive. Gee, I wonder why. /sarcasm

#1: "I think that the lesson I took from it was that just because something is banned or challenged doesn't mean it's going to be a fun and interesting read full of sex, drugs, and profanity."

Does it take sex, drugs, and profanity to make a book interesting?

I don't think asking children to read banned books is necessarily meant to show them what "good" literature is, but instead to get them thinking about how other people see the world and why the books might have been banned in the first place.

#10: "I always wonder why getting kids to read is considered a good thing if what they read makes them dislike reading even more."

It teaches them many different things. One of the most important is how to make their own decisions. Some kids need to be taught that it's okay NOT to like something that everyone else seems to enjoy, and (especially) that it's okay to say so. I remember that a few of my classmates were afraid to speak up in class until they saw that the teachers were positively overjoyed by the fact that I had an opinion and wasn't afraid to express it.

Carlym already expressed a similar idea in #18: "I also think it's important to be able to articulate why a reader doesn't like particular books, so having a few stinkers enables development of that skill."

Just another thought, but once "better" books are introduced, it could also teach them why it's not a good idea to throw the baby out with the bath water. ;)

I'm appalled by the idea that there are teachers out there who take the stance, "you'll read it and you'll like it!" Makes me wonder, was that really their attitude, or was that just how we saw things as kids?

Every day, I thank the gods that I was a defiant little cuss. But I thank them just as much for teachers who knew how to challenge me without alienating me.

Re: #20

An interesting explanation from WikiAnswers, (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_is_Fahrenheit_451_banned):

"The banning of 'Fahrenheit 451' Ray Bradbury's 1953 book about the evils of book banning and censorship is one of those circular jokes that we see every once in a while. The initial complaint was that the words 'hell' and 'damn' appeared in it making it a corrupting force on society.

A more obvious reaosn seems to exist. One of the main themes of the story is that a government which tries to suppress freedom of expression should be opposed. In the early 50's, when this book was written, this advocacy of opposition was seen as a bad thing by real world authoritarian groups (e.g. McCarthyism) that claimed to have all the answers.

Like the opposition to '1984', the opposition to 'Fahrenheit 451' seems to grow as the depicted society grows too similar to our own. One of these uncomfortable parallels is today's increased use of entertainment in place of learning and culture. Ray Bradbury has stated that this dumbing down was one of the concerns he was trying to raise."

Science-Fiction continues to be one of my favorite genres because it's not afraid to explore the "what ifs."

great post, all... (i kept seeing it as "all the species"), nice points...

Thank you.

All the species? I kind of like that. :)